Estructura de Mateo

(1) Cf. R.H. GUNDRY, Matthew. A Commentary on his Literary andTheological Art (Grand Rapids 1982) 11: “the Gospel of Matthew is structurallymixed”.

(2) In the case of a diachronical approach, the attention is focused on theKompositionsgeschichte: the question is then whether and to what extentMatthew, in writing his gospel, was influenced by compositional characteristicsof his sources. See e.g. B. STANDAERT, “L’Évangile selon Matthieu: Compositionet genre littéraire”, The Four Gospels (ed. F. VAN SEGBROECK – C.M. TUCKETT –G. VAN BELLE – J. VERHEYDEN) (BETL, 100-B; Leuven 1992) II, 1223-1250;M.E. BORING, “The Convergence of Source Analysis, Social History and LiteraryStructure in the Gospel of Matthew”, Society of Biblical Literature. SeminarPapers 33 (1994) 598: “Reflections on the way Matthew put his narrative togethermight be expanded to include the composition history of the document, and notonly the compositional features”. According to U. LUZ, Das Evangelium nachMatthäus (EKK I/1; Zürich 1985) I, 16-17, Matthew was so strongly bound to hissources “daß man nicht bei der Strukturanalyse diachrone Fragen ausklammernkann” and therefore he formulates as a first methodical thesis: “Methodischkontrollierbar fragen kann man allein nach der vom Evangelisten bewußtbeabsichtigten Gliederung, nicht nach einer unabhängig davon auf der Textebeneallein existierenden Struktur”.

(3) D.R. BAUER, The Structure of Matthew’s Gospel. A Study in LiteraryDesign (JSNTSS 31; Sheffield 1988) 13. What literary and rhetorical techniquesmust be taken into account in a structural analysis is formulated by H.J.B.COMBRINK, “The Macrostructure of the Gospel of Matthew”, Neotestamentica 16(1982) 6-10.

The Macrostructure of Matthew’s Gospel: A New Proposal

An important question in studying Matthew is how the book isstructured. The results of studies of this issue vary considerably. Thedifferences are so great that it is sometimes seriously doubted whetherthe first gospel in fact has a clear basic structure (1). The diversity ofsolutions can partly be explained by the complexity of the subject, andpartly also by lack of agreement on the methods to be used. Such astudy can be undertaken from a diachronic perspective but it is betterto do so from a literary-synchronic perspective (2). The task with whichthe exegete is faced in the latter case is described by D.R. Bauer asfollows: “a) to determine the major units and sub-units within theGospel, and b) to identify the structural relationships within andbetween these units” (3).

Through the differences in the chosen research perspective, theexisting proposals for the structure of Matthew vary widely. I will not

present a complete description of the status quaestionis here but willrestrict myself to a number of representative examples (sections 1 and2). In section 3, I will present a new proposal for the structure ofMatthew.

1. Narrative blocs and discourses alternate

According to B.W. Bacon, Matthew has divided his gospel, byanalogy to the books of Moses, into five blocs, which are soindependent of each other that they can be considered as five books (4).He bases this idea on two phenomena. The first is that a discourse byJesus is concluded five times with a stereotypical formula (kai; ejgevnetoo{te ejtevlesen ktl. in 7,28; 11,1; 13,53; 19,1; 26,1); according to Bacon,this formula introduces a deep caesura in the text. The secondphenomenon is that each discourse (D) is preceded by an introductorynarrative section (N) that always forms a whole with the relevantdiscourse. In total, this pattern (N + D) occurs five times, so thatMatthew consists of five books, of which the first begins in 3,1 and thelast ends in 25,46. The five books are framed by a preamble (Matt 1–2)and an epilogue (Matt 26–28). In a scheme:

Preamble 1,1–2,23Book 1 3,1–4,25 (N) and 5,1–7,27 (D); formula: 7,28-29Book 2 8,1–9,35 (N) and 9,36–10,42 (D); formula: 11,1Book 3 11,2–12,50 (N) and 13,1-52 (D); formula: 13,53Book 4 13,54–17,20 (N) and 17,22–18,35 (D); formula: 19,1aBook 5 19,1b–22,46 (N) and 23,1–25,46 (D); formula: 26,1

Epilogue 26,3–28,20

The view of Matthew’s Gospel consisting of five books has beensupported by literary analyses of C.R. Smith (5). His two mainarguments are: 1. the Gospel of Matthew alternates between narrativeand discourse, and 2. each narrative introduces a theme on which thefollowing discourse subsequently expounds. The Gospel’s underlyingprinciple is constituted by five consecutive narrative-discourse pairs,in each of which a specific theme relating to the Kingdom is beingelaborated.

172 Wim J.C. Weren

(4) B.W. BACON, “The Five Books of Matthew Against the Jews”, TheExpositor VIII, 85 (1918) 56-66; ID, Studies in Matthew (New York 1930).Largely followed by R.E. BROWN, An Introduction to the New Testament (TheAnchor Bible Reference Library; New York 1997) 172.

(5) C.R. SMITH, “Literary Evidence of a Fivefold Structure in the Gospel ofMatthew”, NTS 43 (1997) 540-551.

Introduction Genealogy (1,1-17)

The foundations of the kingdom First Narrative First Discourse(1,18–4,25) (5,1–7,29)

The mission of the kingdom Second Narrative Second Discourse(8,1–9,38) (10,1-42)

The mystery of the kingdom Third Narrative Third Discourse(11,1–13,9) (13,10-53)

The family of the kingdom Fourth Narrative Fourth Discourse(13,54–17,27) (18,1-35)

The destiny of the kingdom Fifth Narrative Fifth Discourse(19,1–23,39) (24,1–25,46)

Conclusion Passion Narrative(26,1–28,20)

It is obvious that this proposal enriches Bacon’s ideas with newelements. To this it ought to be remarked that the introduction isrestricted to the genealogy, and that the third discourse does not beginuntil 13,10.

The placing of the formula shows where the discourses end, butnot precisely where they begin (6). Does the Sermon on the Mountbegin in 4,23, in 4,25 or in 5,1? Does the Mission Discourse start in10,5b, in 9,35 or in 9,36? Does the Community Discourse begin withthe disciples’ question in 18,1, with the dialogue between Jesus andPeter in 17,24-27 or with the passion prediction in 17,22? Does thediscourse in Matt 23 in fact form a whole with the EschatologicalDiscourse in Matt 24–25? These questions already indicate that thestrict distinction between N and D is rather artificial. This impressionis strengthened when we include Matt 1–2 and 26–28 in the debate.Bacon labels these parts as the prologue and the epilogue, respectively,and therefore they do not form part of the five books that Matthewconsists of. Especially for Matt 26–28, this is hardly convincing, sincethese chapters are indisputably the dramatic climax of Matthew’s storyof Jesus. Given the distinction between N and D, Matt 1–2 and 26–28can also be categorised under N. Or in other words, the alternationbetween N and D is not characteristic of 3,1–25,46 only, but of theentire book. This opinion is defended by C.H. Lohr. According to him,Matthew consists of six narrative sections and five discourses (Matt23–25 is seen as one discourse). He argues for a concentric orderingwith the Parable Discourse as the centre of the entire book (7):

The Macrostructure of Matthew’s Gospel 173

(6) This issue is discussed by T.J. KEEGAN, “Introductory Formulae forMatthean Discourses”, CBQ 44 (1982) 415-430.

(7) C.H. LOHR, “Oral Techniques in the Gospel of Matthew”, CBQ 23 (1961)

A 1–4 Narrative 1: Birth and beginningsB 5–7 Sermon I: Blessings, entering kingdom

C 8–9 Narrative 2: Authority and invitationD 10 Sermon II: Mission Discourse

E 11–12 Narrative 3: Rejection by this generationF 13 Sermon III: Parables of the kingdom

E’ 14–17 Narrative 4: Acknowledgment by disciplesD’ 18 Sermon IV: Community Discourse

C’ 19–22 Narrative 5: Authority and invitationB’ 23–25 Sermon V: Woes, Coming of the kingdom

A’ 26–28 Narrative 6: Death and rebirth

According to Bacon, each discourse is linked up with the narrativebloc that precedes it. This view is based on the fact that he attributes aconcluding function to the stereotypical formula. This has beendisputed by a number of authors. They point out that this formula doesnot so much have a concluding function but rather a linking one (8).After all, it is important that this formula is always found in asubordinate clause introduced by o{te that is combined with a mainclause relating to the continuation of the story. The consequences ofthis view for the segmentation of Matthew have been elaborated asfollows by P. Rolland (9):

Prologue 1,1–4,16: From the Old to the New Testament1. Infancy Narratives (1,1–2,23)2. John the Baptist and Jesus (3,1–4,16)

First Part 4,17–9,34: The Kingdom of God is at Hand1. Introduction and Discourse (4,17–7,29)2. Narrative section (8,1–9,34)

174 Wim J.C. Weren

427. A concentric ordering has also been presented by COMBRINK, “Macro-structure”, 16: A: 1,1–4,17; B: 4,18–7,29; C: 8,1–9,35; D: 9,36–11,1; E:11,2–12,50; F: 13,1-53; E’: 13,54–16,20; D’: 16,21–20,34; C’: 21,1–22,46; B’:23,1–25,46; A’: 26,1–28,20 (similarly in H.J.B. COMBRINK, “The Structure ofMatthew’s Gospel as Narrative”, TynBul 34 (1983) 61-90 (here 71). Thissegmentation of the text differs considerably from Lohr’s mainly in segments E’,D’ and C’.

(8) This is formulated — slightly too strongly — as follows by U. LUZ, DasEvangelium nach Matthäus, I, 19: “... kai; ejgevneto o[te ejtevlesen etc. in 7,28; 11,1;13,53; 19,1; 26,1 schließt syntaktisch nicht eine Rede ab, sondern leitet eine neueEtappe der Erzählung ein!”.

(9) Ph. ROLLAND, “From the Genesis to the End of the World. The Plan ofMatthew’s Gospel”, BTB 2 (1972) 156: “We deem it preferable to consider thetransition formula five times repeated [...] as a connecting link, and to join to eachdiscourse the narratives that follow instead of those that precede”. See also W.SCHMAUCH, “Die Komposition des Matthäus-Evangeliums in ihrer Bedeutung fürseine Interpretation”, ID., ... zu achten aufs Wort. Ausgewählte Arbeiten(Göttingen 1967) 64-87.

Second Part 9,35–12,50: The Lost Sheep of the House of Israel1. Introduction and Discourse (9,35–10,42)2. Narrative section (11,1–12,50)

Third Part 13,1–17,27: I will build my Church1. Discourse (13,1-58)2. Narrative section (14,1–17,27)

Fourth Part 18,1–23,39: The True Israel1. Discourse (18,1-35)2. Narrative section (19,1–23,39)

Fifth Part 24,1–28,20: The Final Victory1. Discourse (24,1–25,46)2. Narrative section (26,1–28,20)

The division into five parts is retained, but the five sections aredifferent from Bacon’s. They do not consist of N + D, but of D + N.The concluding chapters (26–28) are no longer in an isolated position.Furthermore, it is remarkable that Rolland detaches Matt 23 from theEschatological Discourse, but his classifying this chapter as a narrativesection testifies to an urge for regularisation.

After this reversion of the ordering (D + N instead of N + D), acompromise between the two views was bound to be emerge. Thiscompromise was suggested by D.L. Barr (10). He argues that thediscourses are not only connected to the narrative material thatprecedes them, but also to the narrative material by which they arefollowed (pattern: N D N). Schematically, his proposal is asfollows: Matt 1–4 (N) 5–7 (D) 8–9 (N) 10 (D) 11–12 (N)

13,1-52 (D) 13,53–17,27 (N) 18 (D) 19–22 (N) 23–25(D) 26–28 (N).

These examples will suffice to illustrate the discussion on thestructure of Matthew on the basis of the two phenomena signalled byBacon: the stereotypical formula and the alternation of N and D. I willconclude this overview with a critical appraisal.

(1) The formula itself always concludes a discourse, but thecomplete sentence of which it forms a part also links up with whatfollows. It is not possible to gather from the formula where thediscourse begins, nor does it show where the narrative that follows thediscourse exactly ends. For the precise determination of theseboundaries, other criteria must be applied.

(2) The subdivisions mentioned are based on “une distinction

→

→→→→→

→→→→

→→


(10) D.L. BARR, “The Drama of Matthew’s Gospel: A Reconsideration of ItsStructure and Purpose”, Theology Digest 24 (1976) 352: “The discourses are notdividers, but connectors, linking two sections of narrative together”.

artificielle et rigide entre narration et discours” (11). That it would beadvisable not to make this rigid distinction is apparent from the lackof unanimity on the precise demarcation of D and N. The clearestexample of this is that Matt 23 is classified as D by one author and asN by another (and this notwithstanding the fact that we are dealinghere with an uninterrupted monologue by Jesus!). Moreover, the sharpdistinction between N and D suggest that the five long discourses aredetached from the rest of Matthew’s story of Jesus and that theyalways interrupt this story. This position is untenable for, as charactertext, the discourses are principally embedded in the narrator’s text.Moreover it is remarkable that also narrative texts in Matthew have adiscursive character.

(3) Furthermore, I would like to point out two other phenomena.Firstly, in the parts classified as N, Jesus also speaks frequently andsometimes at some length: apart from 11,2-3.7a, Matt 11 only consistsof words spoken by Jesus; 12,25-45 contains a monologue by Jesus,that is only interrupted in 12,38-39a by a remark from his listeners;Matt 19–22 contains many statements by Jesus. Secondly, the reversecan also be observed: the parts that are labelled D contain somenarrative sentences, which remind the reader that the character text isembedded in the narrator’s text (13,10.36; 18,21-22).

2. A story in three acts

A second proposal for the structure of Matthew, that continues tobe influential, was developed by E. Krentz and was subsequentlypropagated by J.D. Kingsbury and D.R. Bauer (12). Their point ofdeparture is the parallelism between 4,17 and 16,21. Both verses openwith ajpo; tovte h[rxato oJ jIhsou'", followed by an infinitive (khruvsseinkai; levgein in 4,17; deiknuvein in 16,21) and a brief summary of thecontent of Jesus’ words. These verses would have a macrosyntacticfunction and serve as the captions of two long sections, the first(4,17–16,20) about Jesus’ proclamation of the kingdom and the second(16,21–28,20) about his journey to Jerusalem and about his passion,

176 Wim J.C. Weren

(11) D.W. GOODING, “Structure Littéraire de Matthieu, XIII,53 à XVIII,35”,RB 85 (1978) 233.

(12) E. KRENTZ, “The Extent of Matthew’s Prologue. Toward the Structure ofthe First Gospel”, JBL 83 (1964) 409-414; J.D. KINGSBURY, “The Structure ofMatthew’s Gospel and His Concept of Salvation-History”, CBQ 35 (1973) 451-474; ID, Matthew. Structure, Christology, Kingdom (London – Philadelphia 1975)1-39 (Chapter I; same title); BAUER, The Structure of Matthew’s Gospel.

death, and resurrection. These two sections are preceded by a long text(1,1–4,16) that functions as a prologue that informs the reader onJesus’ identity. This introductive part also has a caption that relates tothe content of the entire part (bivblo" genevsew" jIhsou' Cristou' uiJou'Daui;d uiJou' jAbraavm). In this perspective, the Gospel according toMatthew consists of three parts:

I. 1,1–4,16 Jesus as a PersonII. 4,17–16,20 His ProclamationIII. 16,21–28,20 His Passion, Death, and Resurrection

In his book Matthew as Story, Kingsbury has elaborated this basicpattern further (13):

I. 1,1–4,16 The Presentation of JesusII. 4,17–16,20 The Ministry of Jesus to Israel and Israel’s Repudiation of Jesus

1. 4,17–11,1 The Ministry of Jesus to Israel2. 11,2–16,20 Israel’s Repudiation of Jesus

III. 16,21–28,20 The Journey of Jesus to Jerusalem and His Suffering, Death, andResurrection

1.16,21–25,46 The Journey of Jesus to Jerusalem and HisActivity in the Temple

2. 26,1–28,20 The Betrayal, Condemnation, Crucifixion,and Resurrection of Jesus

Within this proposal, that does justice to the narrative character ofthe gospel, the stereotypical formula following Jesus’ five discourseshas a linking rather than a dividing function. However, there are deepcaesuras between 4,16 and 4,17 and between 16,20 and 16,21.

That part I (1,1–4,16) is a textual unit is clear, according to theauthors of this option, by two phenomena: a) this long text fragmentshows explicit interest in Jesus’ identity; b) his vicissitudes areregularly presented as the fulfilment of statements from Scripture. Wedo not only encounter these two phenomena in 1,1–2,23 but also in3,1–4,16. It is true that the christological interest emerges strongest inMatt 1–2, where Jesus is referred to in various ways (1,1.16.23;2,2.6.15.23), but this line culminates in 3,17 where God himself callshim his beloved Son. The four formula quotations in Matt 1–2 (1,22-23; 2,15.17-18.23) are also followed up in 4,14-16.


(13) J.D. KINGSBURY, Matthew as Story (Philadelphia 21988) 40-93. Weencounter the same refinements in BAUER, The Structure of Matthew’s Gospel,73-108.

Kingsbury further emphasises that there is only a slight caesurabetween Matt 2 and Matt 3: the particle dev in 3,1 has a linking function,and ejn tai'" hJmevrai" ejkeivnai" bridges a long period of time, also inExod 2,11 (LXX), while the story continues (14). There is not a deepcaesura between 4,11 and 4,12 either since the name Jesus, lastmentioned in 4,10, is not repeated in 4,12.

Matt 1,1 is interpreted as the caption covering the entire part I. Tosupport this opinion, Kingsbury — in imitation of Krentz — points toGen 2,4a and especially to Gen 5,1. In the Septuagint, bivblo" genevsew"in Gen 5,1 introduces a textual unit (5,1–6,8), that consists of agenealogy and a subsequent narrative section. In Matthew, we alsoencounter a genealogy (1,1-17), followed by a long series of stories(1,18–4,16; so not merely 1,18–2,23). Within the entire book, part Ihas the function of a prologue; in preparation to the description ofJesus’ ministry (from 4,17 onwards), the reader is informed, in1,1–4,16, on Jesus’ identity.

Parts II and III are both coherent text units. The caption of part II(4,17) is recapitulated in a number of summaries (4,23-25; 9,35;11,1b)(15). Similarly, the caption of part III (16,21), the prediction ofJesus’ suffering, death, and resurrection, is repeated in 17,22-23 and20,17-19. This latter aspect was somewhat refined by T.B. Slater, whopoints out that 26,2 should also be included in the series mentioned byKingsbury (16).

It is astonishing that this division into three is still so popular(17),for it is some time ago now that F. Neirynck’s apposite criticism hasaccurately revealed the weak link in the entire construction (18). He

178 Wim J.C. Weren

(14) The time adjunct in Exod 2,11 in the LXX is not exactly the same as inMatt 3,1. The LXX has ejn tai'" hJmevrai" tai'" pollai'" ejkeivnai".

(15) In order to express their function as foundation of the story, summariesare labelled as ‘Basisberichte’ by K. BERGER, Formen und Gattungen im NeuenTestament (UTB 2532; Tübingen – Basel 2005) 388-391.

(16) T.B. SLATER, “Notes on Matthew’s Structure”, JBL 99 (1980) 436: “As amere corrective to Kingsbury, the three passion-predictions are 17:22-23, 20:17-19, and 26:2, with 16:21 being more a redactional statement than a prediction”.

(17) See the divisions in: J. GNILKA, Das Matthäusevangelium (HTKNT, I/2;Freiburg – Basel – Wien 1988) II, 524: Vorgeschichte: 1,1–4,16; 1. Hauptteil:4,17–16,20; 2. Hauptteil: 16,21-25,46; Passion und Ostern: 26,1–28,20.

(18) F. NEIRYNCK, “La rédaction matthéenne et la structure du premierévangile”, ETL 43 (1967) 41-73; F. NEIRYNCK, “APO TOTE HRXATO and theStructure of Matthew”, ETL 64 (1988) 21-59.

acknowledges the parallelism in the formulations of 4,17 and 16,21(19),but he disputes the argument that ajpo; tovte h[rxato indicates thebeginning of a new section. To this end, he calls attention to the factthat ajpo; tovte also occurs in Matt 26,16, where it refers to thepreceding verses (26,14-15).

In 16,21 and 4,17, the time adjunct ajpo; tovte is also very closelyconnected with the event narrated immediately before. According toNeirynck, the sentences introduced by ajpo; tovte do belong to a passagethat started earlier: 4,17 is an integral part of 4,12-17; 16,21 introducesa new turn in the conversation between Jesus and his disciples in theneighbourhood of Caesarea Philippi (16,13-28); 26,16 forms theconclusion of 26,3-16. Within the gospel as a whole, these threepericopes occupy an important place: all three introduce a new phase inJesus’ ministry. Neirynck thus attributes a function to the threepericopes that is related to the function that Kingsbury gives to 4,17 and16,21. Still, there is an important difference. Within Kingsbury’sdivision, there is first a period in which Jesus proclaims the kingdom(4,17–16,20), and then a period in which his suffering, death, andresurrection are central (16,21–28,20). According to Neirynck, thedifferent phases cannot be separated so rigidly. On the contrary, it can besaid that they overlap — at least partly. Also after 16,20, Jesus speaksmany times about the kingdom (in 26,29 for the last time); the reverseis also true: Jesus’ death is touched upon before 16,21 (e.g. in 9,15 and12,14.40). Interesting is also Neirynck’s suggestion to include 26,3-16in the series of passages that introduce a new phase. After this passage,the events that have been announced since 16,13-28 come to a head.

I will conclude this section with three critical remarks on detailsfrom Kingsbury’s argument:

(1) According to Kingsbury, the three parts of which Matthewconsists each have their own caption (1,1; 4,17; 16,21), the content ofwhich is elaborated in the section which they introduce. Much can besaid against this. How can the content of 1,1 (Jesus is the son of David,the son of Abraham) be reconciled with Kingsbury’s claim that part Iculminates in 3,17 where Jesus is called the Son of God? There is alsoa certain tension between 4,17 and part II: in 4,17, only Jesus’proclamation is mentioned, while part II also focuses on his acts (see


(19) Except for Matthew, ajpo; tovte h[rxato occurs nowhere else in the NewTestament, nor in the LXX. The time adjunct ajpo; tovte can be found elsewhere:Ezra 5,16; Pss 75,8; 92,2; Qoh 8,12; Matt 26,16; Luke 16,16.

e.g. 11,2). The caption in 16,21 anticipates events that are notextensively elaborated until the passion narrative and hardly covers thecontent of 16,21–25,46.

(2) The substantive correspondence between the caption of 4,17and the summaries in part II (4,23-25; 9,35; 11,1b) is only relative. Thesummaries regularly have didavskein and khruvssein; however, 4,17has khruvssein and levgein. Furthermore, the summaries also mentionJesus’ acts, especially his healings (qerapeuvw). Even moreimportantly, these summaries do not occur after 11,1b whereas part IIdoes not end until 16,20. To a lesser degree, this same objectionapplies to the relation between the caption in 16,21 and the passionpredictions in 17,22-23 and 20,17-19. If, following Slater, 26,2 is alsoadded to this series, the passion predictions are more or less evenlyspread over part III.

(3) Kingsbury describes 4,17–16,20 as “the ministry of Jesus toIsrael and Israel’s repudiation of Jesus”. It bears witness to littlefeeling for nuance that Kingsbury lumps together the Jewish leadersand the people under the all-encompassing term “Israel” and that hespeaks of a negative reaction of the entire Jewish people to Jesus’words and deeds.

3. The Macrostructure of Matthew’s Gospel: A New Solution

In this section, I will present a new proposal concerning themacrostructure of the Gospel according to Matthew, with the startingpoint that this gospel is a narrative text, a story about Jesus. Thenarrator offers his main character ample opportunity to speak. Thesesections are to be considered as character’s text and are as suchembedded in the narrator’s text. The same goes for the five discoursesheld by Jesus that the narrator, judging by his concluding formula,presents as textual units. We must do justice to these units whenanswering the question which sub-structures can be recognised in thebook. Nonetheless, these do not themselves present us with the key tothe determination of the macrostructure.

In this section, I will take a closer look at a number of textualphenomena that have a structuring function. I will begin by discussinga characteristic that the Gospel according to Matthew has in commonwith every other narrative text: the events related take place in acertain temporal and spatial setting (a and b). Assuming the distinctionbetween “kernels” and “satellites”, I will step by step develop a newsolution (c-g).

180 Wim J.C. Weren

a) Temporal information

The book of Matthew covers the period round the birth of Jesus uptill his resurrection from the dead. This juncture is expanded furtherbackward and forward by means of references to the past(retrospections) and to the future (anticipations). The farthest point inthe past to be mentioned in Matthew is the creation of the world(19,4.8), and the furthest point in the future is the coming of the Son ofMan (24,3.27.29.39) or the end of the age (13,39.40.49; 24,3; 28,20).Twice, the narrator indicates that, from a temporal point of view, hestands at great distance from the events that he narrates. In 27,8 and28,15, he mentions two phenomena that originate in the perioddescribed in the book but that “to this day” are still well-known orinfluential.

There are a number of indications that give an idea of the temporalorganisation of Matthew’s story about Jesus. In 1,2-17, the history ofIsrael is reviewed, starting with Abraham and culminating in Jesus. Theepisodes in 1,18–2,23 take place towards the end of the rule of Herodthe Great and at the beginning of Archelaus’ administration. There is along time-span between the establishment of the young Jesus inNazareth (2,22-23) and the ministry of John the Baptist (3,1)(20). Anunspecified period of time passes between the temptation of Jesus inthe desert (4,1-11) and the time when he decides to go and live inCapernaum (4,12-17). The summaries in 4,23 and 9,35 characterize ina few strokes of the pen the activities of Jesus in Galilee during a longperiod of time. In 11,12-13, a review of the history that has been told sofar is to be found; the retroversion formulated here refers back to John’sministry as narrated in 3,1-17 (ajpo; de; tw'n hJmerw'n jIwavnnou tou'baptistou' e{w" a[rti ...); together, John and Jesus have made thekingdom of heaven accessible, whilst “until John came” (e{w" jIwavnnou)it was predicted by all the Prophets and the Torah (21). In 11,25, wecome across the time adjunct ejn ejkeivnw/ tw/' kairw'/, that is then repeatedtwice (12,1 and 14,1). This formula indicates that the time has comewhen Jesus confronts those around him with the necessity to make


(20) G. HÄFNER, “‘Jene Tage’ (Mt 3,1) und die Umfang des matthäischen‘Prologs’”, BZ 37 (1993) 51, challenges the idea that there is a deep caesurabetween 2,23 and 3,1 and he considers the “in those days” used in 3,1 to be a“Verknüpfung von für den Evangelisten zeitlich zusammengehörendenEreignissen”.

(21) In 11,12, ajpov has an inclusive meaning and, in 11,13, e{w" has anexclusive one.

decisive choices. In Jerusalem, Jesus debates with various adversariesfor a whole day in the temple (see 21,18: “in the morning”; 22,23: “thesame day”; 22,46: “from that day”). Not until the passion narrative isthe passage of time described with great precision (22).

For the rest, the indications of time offer little to hold on to in thedetermination of the temporal organisation of the story. The concretetemporal details merely have a function within the pericope in whichthey are to be found (23), or they make a connection with the previouspassage (24). As a rule, tovte, that appears 90 times, has a bindingfunction. An exception to this are the cases of ajpo; tovte (4,17; 16,21;26,16); this temporal notion marks a new phase in the work of Jesus.In 4,17 ajpo; tovte marks the beginning of the period in which Jesusproclaims the coming of the kingdom of heaven. As has already beenmentioned, this period of time starts as soon as he goes to live inCapernaum and not just after, and continues right up till his sufferingand death. Whilst Jesus continues to preach the gospel of the kingdom,he also begins, in 16,13-28, to speak with his disciples about hispending death and resurrection. This marks the beginning of asubperiod that covers his stay near Caesarea Philippi up till two daysbefore Easter (26,16). In 26,17, a new subperiod begins (marked byajpo; tovte in 26,16), when he is indeed handed over to his adversaries.

From this analysis of the temporal information in Matthew, I havecome to the following conclusions. There is an interval of time between2,23 and 3,1 and also between 4,11 and 4,12. Jesus begins his ministryin 4,12-17. The summaries in 4,23 and 9,35 indicate that Jesus is actingas a teacher and healer for a long period of time in Galilee. In 11,2-24,a review is to be found of the ministry of John and Jesus. A new andcrucial phase starts in 11,25. In 16,13-28, Jesus, at that time in theregion of Caesarea Philippi, begins to speak of his suffering, death, andresurrection. The events announced come to a head in the passionnarrative. This scenario, predicted time and again, begins with Judaslooking for the most appropriate time to deliver Jesus up.

b) Topographical information

Most of the topographical details in Matthew are connected toJesus. Although he lives in Nazareth (2,22) and Capernaum (4,13),

182 Wim J.C. Weren

(22) See: 26,2.17.20.31.34.55; 27,1.19.45-46.53.57.62.63.64; 28,1.(23) See 8,13; 12,1; 14,15.23.25; 15,28.32.(24) See 13,1; 17,1; 18,1.

respectively, he does not have a permanent place of abode (cf. 8,20)and moves restlessly from one place to another.

This is a pattern which started right back in 2,1-23: following Jesus’birth in Bethlehem in Judea, Joseph takes him firstly to Egypt, and thento Nazareth in Galilee. Once an adult, he travels from Galilee to thedesert of Judea to be baptized by John and he is led into the desert to betempted by the devil. The temptations bring with them imaginaryjourneys to the holy city of Jerusalem and to a very high mountain.Following this, there is a sequence (4,12–20,34) in which various placesand regions are mentioned. That Matthew uses the same order here asMark in situating his story firstly in Galilee (4,12–15,20), then in thesurrounding area (15,21–18,35), and finally in Judea (19,1–20,34) is notentirely convincing (25). Already in the part situated in Galilee(4,12–15,20), Jesus leaves Galilee and travels to the region of theGadarenes (8,28-34); conversely, in 15,21–18,35 (that according to Allenshould be situated “in the surrounding area of Galilee”), it is mentionedthat Jesus and his disciples are in Galilee (17,22), in Capernaum to beprecise (17,24). It is only from Matt 21 onwards that there is an obviousunity of place. In 21,1–28,15, the events related take place in Jerusalemor in the surrounding area of this city. The book ends, however, in theregion in which Jesus was active for a long period of time: in 28,16-20,the risen Lord appears to the eleven on a mountain in Galilee.

Thus, at first sight, few connections are to be found in the spatialsetting of the events related. However, the impression given hereevaporates when we note that various topographical data are clusteredtogether by means of three refrains that are connected to one another.

The first refrain was discovered by F. Breukelman and is to befound in 1,1–16,20 (26). It can be recognized by the verb ajnacwrevw (=to withdraw), that is used in seven cases to indicate a move to anotherplace:

2,12-13 And having been warned in a dream not to return to Herod, they (= thewise men) left (ajnecwvrhsan) for their own country by another road.Now after they had left (ajnacwrhsavntwn) [...]

2,14 Then Joseph […] went to (ajnecwvrhsen) Egypt.2,22-23 But when he heard that [...]. And after being warned in a dream, he went

away (ajnecwvrhsen) to the district of Galilee. There he made his homein a town called Nazareth, [...]


(25) This pattern is found in: W.C. ALLEN, A Critical and ExegeticalCommentary on the Gospel according to S. Matthew (ICC; Edinburgh 31947)LXIII-LXIV.

(26) F. BREUKELMAN, Bijbelse theologie (Kampen 1984) III, 144-166.

4,12 Now when Jesus heard that John had been arrested, he withdrew(ajnecwvrhsen) to Galilee.

12,15 When Jesus became aware of this, he departed (ajnecwvrhsen).14,13 Now when Jesus heard this, he withdrew (ajnecwvrhsen) from there in a

boat to a deserted place by himself.15,21 Jesus left that place and went away (ajnecwvrhsen) to the district of Tyre

and Sidon.

That these sentences have the character of a refrain is clear fromthe fact that, apart from the verb ajnacwrevw, they also have a numberof other fixed elements: a) people close to Jesus or Jesus himselfwithdraw(s); b) they do this because they hear or perceive that Jesus isbeing threatened by his adversaries; c) this withdrawal brings him to anew location that is usually named explicitly; d) in four cases, therefrain is accompanied by a fulfilment quotation (2,15.23; 4,14-16;12,18-21).

The whole series shows a certain amount of progression. Initially,the wise men and Joseph are the subject of ajnacwrevw (2,12-13.14.22)but, from 4,12 onwards, this action is completed by Jesus himself. Hislife is threatened firstly by the local political leaders, Herod the Great(2,12-13.14) and his sons Archelaus (2,22) and Antipas (4,12; 14,13),but further on in the book, his circle of enemies is expanded with thePharisees (12,14; 15,21), who are plotting his death. Progression canalso be observed in the fact that Galilee, a region where initially Jesusis still safe (2,22; 4,12), is gradually becoming a hazardous area, as aresult of which Jesus begins to avoid towns and villages, staying inuninhabited areas (14,13), and even venturing in the direction of thedistrict of Tyre and Sidon, places inhabited by the gentiles (15,31).Having turned his back on the Pharisees and the Sadduccees (16,4), heleaves for the region of Caesarea Philippi. These moves have theremarkable effect of increasing Jesus’ radius of action: in fact, hemeets large crowds even in uninhabited areas, and, although he knowsthat he has been sent only for the lost sheep of the house of Israel(15,24), he relents to a woman from the world of the gentiles and hasmercy on her, too.

The fulfilment quotations connected to this refrain make it clearthat Jesus’ wanderings take place according to a certain plan and thatthey have already been announced in texts of the Scripture that arepresented by the narrator as God’s own words. Thus, Jesus does nottravel so restlessly through fear of his enemies, but in obedience toGod.

The refrain discussed focuses the attention on the constant thatJesus distances himself from Jerusalem and Judea, his native soil. This

184 Wim J.C. Weren

movement ends in the region of Caesarea Philippi (16,13-28) and isaltered by Jesus himself. As from this passage, we come across a newrefrain that is expressed as follows.

16,21 From that time on, Jesus began to show his disciples that he must go toJerusalem and undergo great suffering at the hands of the elders andchief priests and scribes, and be killed, and on the third day be raised.

17,22-23 “The Son of Man is going to be betrayed into human hands, and theywill kill him, and on the third day he will be raised”.

20,18-19 “See, we are going up to Jerusalem, and the Son of Man will be handedover to the chief priests and scribes, and they will condemn him todeath; then they will hand him over to the Gentiles to be mocked andflogged and crucified; and on the third day he will be raised”.

26,2 “You know that after two days the Passover is coming, and the Son ofMan will be handed over to be crucified”.

In 16,21 this refrain belongs to the narrator’s text; in the three othercases, the narrator puts the words of the announcement into Jesus’mouth. The refrain can be recognized by the following fixed elements:a) Jesus travels purposefully and of his own free will; b) the journeytakes him to Jerusalem (16,21; 20,17.18); c) he will be crucified there,but God will raise him up on the third day; d) the journey to Jerusalemis — just as those moves undertaken in 1,1–16,20 — covered by theordinance of God (see dei' in 16,21); e) the refrain anticipates theevents related in 26,17–28,15.

At the time the events proclaimed are actually taking place inJerusalem, a third and last refrain echoes:

26,32 “But after I am raised up, I will go ahead of you to Galilee”.28,7 “… and indeed he is going ahead of you to Galilee; there you will see

him”. 28,10 “… go and tell my brothers to go to Galilee; there they will see me”.

These sentences are spoken by Jesus (28,32; 28,10) and by anangel of the Lord (28,7) and contain the following fixed elements: a)the speaker anticipates the period following the resurrection of Jesus;b) mention is made of a future reunion between the resurrected Jesusand his disciples; c) the reunion will take place in Galilee.

In the five concluding verses of Matthew (28,16-20), the raisedexpectation is fulfilled on a mountain in Galilee. This location resultsin a certain contrast between 28,16-20 and the long section in whichthe place of action is Jerusalem. In this case, Galilee is the base ofoperation for movement in every direction, the world over. FromGalilee, Jesus sends his disciples to all nations with the promise thathe will remain amongst them until the end of the age. Thus, in 28,16-20, the book ends with the beginning of a new journey, the starting


point of which (Galilee), the range (all nations) and the duration (tillthe end of the age) are indicated, whilst concrete details on the stagesof the journey are not mentioned at all.

These observations lead me to the conclusion that, on the basis ofthe topographical information that differs greatly in itself, we candistinguish three patterns:

Pattern 1: Jesus flees from his enemies and thus expands his radius of action.Pattern 2: He voluntarily travels to Jerusalem, where he is to suffer and die and be

raised up by God.Pattern 3: From Galilee, Jesus sends his disciples out to teach all nations until the

end of the age.

These three patterns are connected to one another. Pattern 2 ispartly a reversal of pattern 1, whilst pattern 3 is an extension of pattern2. The three patterns are not separated from each other by rigidcaesuras. Pattern 1 ends in the same textual unity (16,13-28) withwhich pattern 2 begins. In turn, pattern 2 reaches its peak in a textualunity (27,55–28,20), the last scene of which (28,16-20) touches onpattern 3.

c) Kernels with satellites or pericopes with a hinge function?

Having reached this point, I want to draw attention to a number ofnew insights in the structure of Matthew that are a result of a narrativeanalysis of this book. According to F. Matera, a long and complexstory such as that of Matthew is more than just a sum of individualincidents (27). An important question is why the story that is beingrelated passes in the way it does. This question concerns the plot or theintrigue of the book, that is to say, to the phenomenon that theindividual incidents are arranged in a certain way in relation to oneanother by their mutual temporal and causal relations. Each individualepisode does not weigh equally in the determination of the book’s plot.Certain events initiate a turning point that influences the continuationof the story. Following S. Chatman, Matera calls such events “majorevents” or “kernels”. They contribute to the fact that it becomes moreand more likely that the story will end in a certain way and, in thatsense, they are essential for the development of the plot of the book.

According to Matera, a turning point occurs as a rule in a relativelyshort passage that is followed by a series of sub-texts in which eventsare presented that are a consequence of the new step that has been

186 Wim J.C. Weren

(27) F. MATERA, “The Plot of Matthew’s Gospel”, CBQ 49 (1987) 233-253.

taken in the kernel. Because these events (“minor events”) do notthemselves offer new moments of choice, but instead elaborate on theone already made, they are not entirely indispensable. They do,however, fill the void between one kernel and the next.

Matera uses these theoretical distinctions to find an answer to threequestions: a) What is the plot in Matthew?; b) Where are the “kernels”within the plot of Matthew’s Gospel?; c) What kind of narrative blocksdoes Matthew consist of?

In answering the first question, Matera assumes that the salvationhistory is the most central notion in Matthew. After all, the book doesextend all the way from Abraham (1,1) to the end of the age (28,20).Within this huge framework, it describes how Jesus, on the one hand,is (or: was) united with the people of Israel and, on the other, how heincreasingly becomes accepted by gentiles.

Matera sums up six passages in which there is a decisive turningpoint: 2,1a: the birth of Jesus; 4,12-17: the beginning of Jesus’ministry; 11,2-6: John’s question; 16,13-28: the conversation in thedistrict of Caesarea Philippi; 21,1-17: the cleansing of the temple;28,16-20: the sending out of the disciples.

The first five kernels are accompanied by a number of satellites,together with which they form a narrative block; in the case of the lastkernel, such satellites are absent:

“Kernels”: Narrative blocks: Description:

2,1a 1. 1,1–4,11 The coming of the Messiah4,12-17 2. 4,12–11,1 The Messiah’s ministry to Israel of preaching,

teaching, and healing11,2-6 3. 11,2–16,12 The crisis in the Messiah’s ministry16,13-28 4. 16,13–20,34 The Messiah’s journey to Jerusalem21,1-17 5. 21,1–28,15 The Messiah’s death and resurrection28,16-20 6. 28,16-20 The great commission

An adapted form of Matera’s hypothesis has been adopted by W.Carter (28). The following scheme shows what the modified plan ofMatthew’s Gospel looks like.

“Kernels”: Narrative blocks: Description:

1,18-25 1. 1,1–4,16 God is the origin of Jesus4,17-25 2. 4,17–11,1 Jesus manifests God’s saving presence in his

preaching and healing


(28) W. CARTER, “Kernels and Narrative Blocks: The Structure of Matthew’sGospel”, CBQ 54 (1992) 463-481. See also: ID., Matthew: Storyteller, Interpreter,Evangelist (Peabody, MA 1996) 159-175.

11,2-6 3. 11,2–16,20 Jesus’ actions reveal his identity as God’scommissioned agent, necessitating a responseto the question of whether Israel will recognisehim as God’s Messiah

16,21-28 4. 16,21–20,34 Jesus speaks to his disciples about his deathand resurrection, an event that also shapesdiscipleship

21,1-27 5. 21,1–27,66 In Jerusalem, Jesus is rejected by the Jewishleaders

28,1-10 6. 28,1-20 The resurrected Jesus commissions hisdisciples to a worldwide mission

Both authors come to a total of six narrative blocks. All sorts ofdifferences become apparent in their demarcation. Carter agrees withthe caesuras recommended by Kingsbury between 4,16 and 4,17 andbetween 16,20 and 16,21. He also places a caesura between 27,66 and28,1, which is hard to defend. With the exception of 11,2-6, the“kernels” suggested by Matera are also revised. Major modificationsinclude the replacement of 2,1a (merely a subordinate clause) by 1,18-25 and 28,16-20 is no longer considered as a(n isolated) turning pointin itself, but is given the status of a satellite of 28,1-10. The minordifferences are that Matera’s “kernels” are demarcated differently inthree cases (4,17-25 instead of 4,12-17; 16,21-28 instead of 16,13-28;21,1-27 instead of 21,1-17).

Both studies make it clear that certain passages have a macrosyntactical function: they bring about a turning point in the plot, aturning point that is fleshed out in a large number of the subsequentpericopes. I agree with this principle, but also expand on it with thesuggestion that such cardinal passages at the same time refer to thepreceding block. With this double function in mind, I refer to them ashinge texts. In the following subsections, I will indicate whichpassages fulfil this double function and examine the scope of thenarrative blocks that precede and follow these hinge texts.

d) Matt 4,12-17 and 26,1-16 as hinge texts within the book as awhole

Partly on the basis of the above, I will gradually develop a newoutlook on the macrostructure of Matthew. My first step is that thebook consists of a corpus (4,18–25,46), in which a continuous story ispresented of Jesus’ ministry, and that this corpus is contained in anoverture (1,1–4,11) and a finale (26,17–28,20). The overture isconnected to the corpus by means of a hinge text (4,12-17), whilstthere is also a hinge text to be found in the transition from corpus tofinale (26,1-16). In a schematic overview:

188 Wim J.C. Weren

overture hinge corpus hinge finale

1,1–4,11 4,12-17 4,18–25,46 26,1-16 26,17–28,20

The overture (1,1–4,11) is a textual unit, in which the narratorpresents an image of the origin and identity of Jesus, and his futuretask. His origin is mentioned in Matt 1–2 (gevnesi" in 1,1.18). Variousdescriptions clarify his identity: son of David, son of Abraham (1,1),Messiah (1,16), Emmanuel (1,23), king of the Jews (2,2), ruler orshepherd of the people of Israel (2,6), Nazorean (2,23), Son of God(2,15; 3,17). Jesus’ future task is described twice: he will save hispeople from their sins (1,21) and he is to fulfil all righteousness (3,15).A disadvantage to the regularly applied term “prologue” is that it givesthe impression that 1,1–4,11 is a non-narrative introductory section,like the prologue in John 1,1-18. The term “overture” does morejustice to the fact that Matthew’s story about Jesus already begins in1,18. We can distinguish two sections within the overture as a whole(1,1–2,23 and 3,1–4,11) (29). The caesura between 4,11 and 4,12 is,however, much deeper than the one between 2,23 and 3,1; not until4,12 does the public ministry of Jesus begin.

In the finale (26,17–28,20), Jesus’ suffering and death and hisresurrection are described. The term “finale” has been chosen in orderto express that the passion narrative is an integrated constituent thatforms the climax of the entire book.

The overture and the finale are connected with one another inmany respects. The stories about the beginning of Jesus’ life and thepreparations for his mission point towards the passion narrative, andconversely, the last part points back to the beginning again (30).

The corpus covers the whole of Jesus’ public ministry. That thislengthy piece is a literary unit is confirmed by the fact that the narratorhas his main character hold five discourses that are arrangedchiastically in relation to one another. The “programme” discourse atthe beginning, the Sermon on the Mount, has a counterpart in theEschatological Discourse; the Missionary Discourse and theCommunity Discourse discuss the disciples’ mission and their mutual


(29) W. DAVIES – D.C. ALLISON, The Gospel according to Saint Matthew. ACritical and Exegetical Commentary (ICC; Edinburg 1988) I, 286-287, are of theopinion that there is a deep caesura between 2,23 and 3,1.

(30) A detailed list of correspondences is to be found in W. WEREN, Matteüs(Belichting van het bijbelboek; ’s-Hertogenbosch – Brugge 1994) 253-255.

relationships; the Parable Discourse has a central position and explainswhy the secrets of the kingdom are accessible to the disciples, whilstthey are a mystery to outsiders.

The corpus of the book is connected to the overture and the finaleby means of hinge texts (4,12-17 and 26,1-16). The first hinge textbridges 1,1-4,11 and 4,18–25,46. This can be clarified as follows.Jesus’ move (4,12) is part of a continuous line that has begun in theoverture (2,12-13.14.22) and that is later continued (12,15;14,13;15,21). The many places mentioned in 4,12-17 are a continuation ofthe accumulating topographical information in Matt 2, whereby thesimilarities between 4,12-16 and 2,22-23 draw particular attention.Matt 4,12-17 is also connected to the preceding text by the mention, in4,12, of John the Baptist, who had already been introduced in 3,1, andby the parallels between John’s and Jesus’ message (3,2 = 4,17).Finally, there are several connections between 4,12-17 and the corpus:Capernaum, Jesus’ new home town, functions as the starting point forhis wanderings through Galilee, and the kingdom of heaven remainsan important subject throughout of his entire ministry.

Matt 26,1-16 functions as a hinge between the heart of the bookand the finale. There is strong indication of this in the subordinateclause in 26,1 that gives a review of Jesus’ ministry and, in thiscontext, focuses on the five discourses (“all these words”). In 26,2,Jesus repeats his earlier announcements of his death (16,21; 17,22-23;20,18-19), but by adding that the events announced will occur withintwo days, his statement at the same time functions as a heading to thepassion narrative. The passage that follows (26,3-16) also anticipatesthe events to take place: together with Judas, the adversaries makepreparations for Jesus’ arrest (26,3-5.14-16), whilst the tender gestureby an anonymous woman is connected to his funeral (26,6-13).

e) Matt 16,13-28 as a hinge within 4,18–25,46

The next problem is the structure of the corpus (4,12–25,46).According to Matera, 16,13-28 is a textual unit. I support his criticismof the idea that this passage is split in two by ajpo; tovte on the groundsof the following considerations. This passage has a unity of place (inthe district of Caesarea Philippi). Jesus is accompanied only by hisdisciples here. The text consists mainly of direct speech and regularlyalternates between the parts where Jesus is talking to all the disciples(16,13-15.20-21.24-28), and the parts in which he is in dialogue withPeter (16,16-19.22-23), whereby we are struck by the contrast between

190 Wim J.C. Weren

what Jesus says to Peter in 16,17-18 and his statement in 16,23(31). Thepassage as a whole is framed by the two references to the Son of Man(an inclusio).

What then is the function of 16,13-28? Matera sees this part as a“kernel”, in which, for the first time, the journey of the Messiah toJerusalem is mentioned; this journey is entered into in more detail inthe satellite texts that follow (17,1–20,34). In my opinion, 16,13-28extends much further than this: this passage points ahead to17,1–25,46, because it is not until 26,2 that there is a signal that therecurring announcement of Jesus’ death actually becomes reality.Matera does not mention that 16,13-28 at the same time offers arecapitulation of the material from 4,18–16,12. As a result of thisdouble direction of focus, I consider 16,13-28 not so much as a“kernel”, but as a hinge within the whole corpus.

The hinge function of 16,13-28 appears from a number of textualphenomena. The first topographical pattern (to withdraw) ends in thispassage, whilst the second pattern (to and in Jerusalem) starts in thevery same part. Further, the connections with 4,18–16,12 are clearlyobvious: the question put by Jesus to his disciples with regard to hisidentity is related to John’s question of whether he is the one that wasto come (11,2); that, according to some, he was John the Baptist is anecho of the opinion expressed in 14,2 by Herod Antipas; Peter’sanswer (“you are the Messiah, the Son of the living God”) links withthe disciples’ confession in 14,33; that the knowledge of Jesus’ identitycan only result from divine revelation is also expressed in 11,27. Apartfrom recapitulations of the preceding text, 16,13-28 also anticipateslater parts: the word “church” is also used in 18,17 (and is not furthermentioned in Matthew); the role assigned to Peter (to bind and unbind)is linked with the role mentioned in 18,18 of the local church; thecombination of an announcement of the passion with the instructionsto the disciples on the implications of being followers (16,21-28) isrepeated in 20,17-28.

f) The structure of 4,18–16,12

The first part of the corpus (4,18–16,12) is again made up of twosections (4,18–11,1 and 12,1–16,12), that are connected to one anotherby means of a hinge text (11,2-30). In a schematic overview:


(31) First of all, Peter is praised as the receiver of God’s revelation; then Jesusreproaches him for his thoughts not being those of God; first he is indicated asbeing a rock and then as a stumbling block.

4,18–16,12 16,13-28 (hinge) 17,1–25,46

4,18–11,1 11,2-30 (hinge) 12,1–16,12

Matt 4,18–11,1 opens with the calling of four fishermen (4,18-22)and closes with the instructions given to the twelve apostles(9,36–10,42). Although these two passages rather vary in length, acertain thematic similarity cannot be denied. Central in both cases isthat Jesus assigns particular followers a task that is the continuation ofhis own mission.

One of the next structuring phenomena are the summaries in 4,23and 9,35, that are practically identically worded (similarities in italics):

4,23 Kai; perih'gen ejn o{lh/ th'/ Galilaiva/, didavskwn ejn tai'" sunagwgai'" aujtw'n kai;khruvsswn to; eujaggevlion th'" basileiva" kai; qerapeuvwn pa'san novson kai;pa'san malakivan ejn tw/' law/'.

9,35 Kai; perih'gen oJ jIhsou'" ta;" povlei" pavsa" kai; ta;" kwvma", didavskwn ejn tai'"sunagwgai'" aujtw'n kai; khruvsswn to; eujaggevlion th'" basileiva" kai;qerapeuvwn pa'san novson kai; pa'san malakivan.

In each case, an imperfectum iterativum (perih'gen) is followed bythree participles that shed light on the various facets of Jesus’ ministry:to teach, to preach, and to heal. An echo of these summaries is heardin 11,1b: metevbh ejkei'qen tou' didavskein kai; khruvssein ejn tai'"povlesin aujtw'n. In this case, only Jesus’ role as a teacher and preacheris mentioned, and not his role as a healer.

His role as a teacher is concretized in the Sermon on the Mount(4,24–8,1). Jesus’ lengthy and uninterrupted monologue (5,3–7,27) isembedded in a narrative framework (4,24–5,2 and 7,28–8,1), in whicha number of elements mentioned in the beginning are repeated at theend, but then in reverse order:

a 4,25 hjkolouvqhsan aujtw'/ o[cloi polloi;b 5,1 ajnevbh eij" to; o[ro"c 5,2 ejdivdaskenc’ 7,29 h\n ga;r didavskwnb’ 8,1 katabavnto" de; aujtou' ajpo; tou' o[rou"a’ 8,1 hjkolouvqhsan aujtw'/ o[cloi polloiv

The role of Jesus as a healer is elaborated in 8,2–9,34, where heperforms “deeds of power” (dunavmei"), that are referred to in 11,20 asbeing “the deeds of the Messiah”. That he is someone with authority isobvious from his words (7,29) as well as his deeds (8,9; 9,6.8).

Jesus’ second sermon, the Missionary Discourse (10,5-42), ispreceded by a narrative introduction (9,36–10,4) and ends in 11,1a

192 Wim J.C. Weren

with the stereotype formula already applied in 7,28. A number ofelements from the narrative introduction to the Sermon on the Mountrecur in 9,36-37:

5,1 ijdw;n de; tou;" o[clou" 9,36 ijdw;n de; tou;" o[clou"oiJ maqhtai; aujtou' [...] ejdivdasken 9,37 tovte levgei toi'" maqhtai'" aujtou'aujtou;" levgwn

Matt 10,1 takes up the summarizing sketch of Jesus’ work in 4,23and 9,35: the twelve disciples are given the power to cast out uncleanspirits and to cure every sickness and disease. Remarkably, they arenot yet assigned the task of teaching; this does not happen until 28,20(didavskonte" aujtou;"), when they have heard everything Jesus has tosay to them. In 11,1b, the only thing we hear is that Jesus journeysfrom one town to another in order to teach and proclaim his message.

In the above, 11,2-30 is labelled as a textual unit with a hingefunction. This standpoint deserves further explanation. First, I willenter into the proposed demarcation: is 11,2-30 indeed a textual unit?

Matt 11,2-30 is almost entirely made up of direct speech that, withthe exception of 11,3 is spoken entirely by Jesus. His words are onlyinterrupted by short narrative sentences (11,7a.20.25a), that indicate towhom the speaker is talking. The coherence within 11,2-30 is alsoobvious from other phenomena. That 11,2-6 and 11,7-19 belongtogether, is evident on the grounds of an inclusio (11,2: “the deeds ofthe Messiah”; 11,19: “the deeds of wisdom”). The command given toJohn’s disciples (11,4: “Go ..”.) is executed in 11,7 (“As they wentaway ..”.). Following John’s question about Jesus, Jesus himselfbegins to speak about John. The narrative introduction in 11,7resembles that of 11,20 (h[rxato, followed by an infinitive: levgein andojneidivzein, respectively). The time adjunct in 11,25 links not only 12,1but also the section preceding 11,25.

And now the query as to the function of 11,2-30. In my opinion,11,2-30 does not have the character of a new episode in the story thatis being related. Rather, the reader is given the impression that thestory is momentarily interrupted here for an interim balance. Mysuggestion that this passage functions as a hinge is based on thepresence in the text of retrospective and anticipating elements. First, Iwill mention a number of retrospective elements.

In 11,2-6, John’s followers ask the question whether Jesus isindeed the eschatological bringer of salvation (su; ei\ oJ ejrcovmeno"). Theterm chosen reminds us of 3,11: oJ de; ojpivsw mou ejrcovmeno". Johnallows the question to be asked as a result of news about ta; e[rga tou'


Cristou', a syntagm that is a recapitulation of the stories about Jesus’deeds in 8,2–9,34. “Hear” and “see” in 11,4 refer back to the Sermonon the Mount and the series of stories that follow in which Jesusproves in word and in deed that he really is the Messiah. The recital in11,5 includes allusions to Isaiah (Isa 29,18-19; 35,5-6; 61,1) but, at thesame time, it is a generalizing reproduction of individual cases that aredescribed in 8,2–9,34 (32). The concluding beatitude in 11,6 reminds usof the beatitudes in 5,3-12. In short: in 11,2-6, Jesus gives an evalua-tive review of his own ministry in answer to a question presented byJohn.

In 11,7-19, Jesus in turn asks a question about John, that heanswers himself and that he seizes upon for an evaluative review of theBaptist’s ministry. The question put three times to the people as to whythey went to the desert (11,7.8.9) refers to 3,5 in combination with 3,1.John is not a man dressed in fine clothes (11,8), which fits 3,4 wherehe is dressed in a cloak made of camel’s hair. Jesus’ description of Johnin 11,10 is similar to the way in which John is presented in 3,3 by thenarrator (in each case: ou|tov" ejstin, followed by a quotation from theScriptures). John’s ministry is the last preparation for the coming ofJesus. According to 11,10, he comes ahead of Jesus (pro; proswvpousou and e[mprosqevn sou); this corresponds with 3,11 in which it is saidof Jesus that he will come after John (ojpivsw mou). The past is furtherstructured in 11,12-13. In these verses, an attempt is made todifferentiate between prediction and fulfilment. The period of fulfil-ment has begun with the coming of John. Characteristic of this periodis that the kingdom has a hard time of it (biavzetai has a passivemeaning: “suffer violence”) and that adversaries (biastai; has anegative connotation) try to prevent its growth. The contemporaries ofJesus and John also react in a negative way towards them (11,16-19).Matt 11,20-24 also reviews the events told earlier. That Jesus’powerful deeds in the towns did not lead to conversion relates to thestories about his deeds in 8,2–9,34 and to his call for conversion in4,17. Capernaum, Jesus’ own town (cf. 4,13; 8,5; 9,1), will bear thebrunt.

Anticipating elements are to be found in particular in 11,25-30.The time adjunct ejn ejkeivnw/ tw/' kairw/' is mentioned in 11,25 for the first

194 Wim J.C. Weren

(32) “The blind receive their sight”: cf. 9,27-31; “the lame walk”: cf. 9,2-8;“the lepers are cleansed”: cf. 8,2-4; “the deaf hear”: cf. 9,32-34, where a mutebegins to speak; “the dead are raised” cf. 9,18-19.23-26; “the good news isbrought to the poor”; cf. “the poor” in 5,3 and “the good news” in 4,23 and 9,35.

time and is repeated in 12,1 and 14,1. That God is the origin of therevelation is confirmed in 16,17. Most important is that, in 11,25-27,there is for the first time a split between those who are impervious tothe revelation, and those who are receptive to it. This distinctiondominates the chapters to follow, where an explanation is given (e.g.13,10-17).

The interim balance in 11,2-30 is followed by a lengthy sequence(12,1–16,12), in which the moves of Jesus form a repeatedly recurringrefrain (12,15; 14,13; 15,21). In 4,18–11,1, he was especially active inthe towns of Galilee (cf. the adjuncts of place in 4,23; 9,35; 11,1),whereas now he spends more and more of his time in uninhabitedareas(33).

Already in the first reading, it is apparent that the ParableDiscourse is an individual subunit within this lengthy sequence(marked as such by the narrator in 13,53a). This discourse is flankedon two sides by narrative blocks (12,1-50 and 14,1–16,12), both ofwhich start with ejn ejkeivnw/ tw/' kairw/' and which also show many othersimilarities: Jesus is forced to move due to his increasing conflicts withthe Pharisees (mentioned in 12,2.14.24.38 and in 15,1.12; 16,1.6.11-12), whom he typifies as “a wicked and adulterous generation”(12,39.45 and 16,4). He is disturbed by their words (12,25-45), theirtraditions (15,1-20), and their teaching (16,1-12), and, at their requestfor a sign, he refers to the sign of Jonah (12,38-39 and 16,1-4); despitethe opposition he tirelessly continues to heal the sick (12,9-14.15.22and 14,14.35-36; 15,21-28.30-31).

That 14,1–16,12 is a coherent subunit is supported by threearguments: a) this section is strongly dominated by words that arerelated to food (34); b) in this part, frequent mention is made of thecrossing of the lake (14,13.22-34; 15,39; 16,5); c) there are tworetrospections at the end of 16,1-12: 16,9 refers back to the feeding ofthe five thousand in 14,13-21, and 16,10 to the feeding of the fourthousand in 15,29-39.

The sequence thus defined has a concentric structure. Its heart isthe Parable Sermon (C), which is surrounded by two short scenes (B:12,46-50; B’: 13,53-58), that have in common that Jesus’ mother and


(33) I.e. 12,1: through the grain fields; 12,15: to an unidentified place; 14,13:to a deserted place; 14,23: up the mountain; 14,25ff: on the sea; 15,29: along theSea of Galilee ... up the mountain (= in the desert, cf. 15,33).

(34) Such words are of course unavoidable in the two feeding narratives(14,13-21; 15,29-39), but they can also be found in 15,1-20; 15,21-28; 16,1-12.

his brothers and sisters are mentioned. Around these are again twolonger parts (A: 12,1-45; A’: 14,1–16,12), in which Jesus is in disputewith the Pharisees.

g) The structure of 17,1–25,46

The second part of the corpus (17,1–25,46) exhibits roughly thesame pattern as the first part. It also has two long sections (17,1–20,24and 21,18–25,46), that are linked to one another by a hinge text (21,1-17). In a schematic overview:

4,18–16,12 16,13-28 17,1–25,46(hinge)

4,18–11,1 11,2-30 12,1–16,12 17,1–20,34 21,1-17 21,18–25,46 (hinge) (hinge)

That 17,1–20,34 is a continuous sequence is determined especiallyby the new refrain that combines the various topographical informationto form a long journey to Jerusalem. The refrain is introduced in 16,21to return in its most complete form in 17,22-23 and 20,18-19; parts ofit are also echoed in 17,9.12 and 20,28. In comparison with 4,18–16,12,Jesus now travels in the opposite direction. This impression isstrengthened by the fact that stopping places are mentioned (amountain, the lake at Capernaum, his house) that were also mentionedwhen he moved further away from Jerusalem and Judea. As from 19,1,he leaves Galilee and continues his journey through Judea, with Jerichobeing the last place he visits before arriving in Jerusalem. The journeyto Jerusalem is thus divided into two routes (17,1-27 and 19,1–20,34).The first route brings him to Capernaum where he holds one of hislengthy discourses. Summarized:

A 17,1-27 The first route: from the district of Caesarea Philippi to CapernaumB 18,1-35 Discourse on the mutual relations within the communityA’ 19,1–20,34 The second route: from Capernaum in Galilee to Jericho in Judea

The journey’s destination is reached in 21,1-17. This part is atextual unit, because it has unity of time. In Mt, the entry intoJerusalem and the cleansing of the temple both take place on the sameday (in Mark, this covers two days). It is not until 21,17 that Jesusleaves the city to spend the night in Bethany (35). The passage also has

196 Wim J.C. Weren

(35) Cf. GNILKA, Das Matthäusevangelium, II, 209: “Man könnte von einemTag Jesu in Jerusalem sprechen, der durch Einzug und Tempelprotestgekennzeichnet ist”.

unity of place, because the adjuncts of place in 21,1.10.12.17 are acontinuation of one another that together create the impression ofcontinuous movement. In the first nine verses, Jesus is in the vicinityof Jerusalem, in 21,10 he enters the city, in 21,12 he enters the templeand in 21,17 he leaves the city.

As Jesus reaches his destination in 21,1-17, we could consider thispassage to be part of the preceding text. However, because on arrivalhe immediately undertakes a number of controversial actions in thetemple, thus becoming involved in a short debate with the chief priestand scribes, who cross his path again later, we can also consider thispassage as an introduction to the sequel. The connection with thepreceding block is also clear from the indication of Jesus as the Son ofDavid (in 20,30-31 as well as 21,9). The crowd mentioned in 21,8-10are not inhabitants of Jerusalem but people who have travelled withJesus to Jerusalem. They announce to the “whole city” that the manentering Jerusalem is a prophet, that his name is Jesus, and that hecomes from Nazareth in Galilee. All this is information from earlierpassages in the book. The places named, “the Mount of Olives”, “thetemple”, and “Bethany”, show a connection with the sequel; all theselocations, entered for the first time in 21,1-17, recur in subsequentpassages. In view of all these connections with the preceding text andwhat follows, we can again typify this passage as a hinge text.

After his arrival in Jerusalem, Jesus continues with the work hehad been doing up till then: he heals the sick, debates with hisadversaries and instructs his disciples. This is clearly expressed in thediscourse he holds on the Mount of Olives (cf. “the mountain” in 5,1),in the presence of his disciples. In the sequence on Jesus’ activities inthe city, we can discern a clear structure:

21,18–25,46 Jesus is active in JerusalemA 21,18-22 A fig tree withersB 21,23–23,39 Debates with adversaries in the templeA’ 24,1-2 The temple shall be destroyedC 24,3–25,46 Discourse: the coming of the Son of Man

Some explanation is necessary here. The whole block(21,18–25,46) takes place — just as 21,1-17 — on one day (see 21,18;22,23.46). It is the day after the entry into Jerusalem that is largelytaken up with debates in the temple (21,23; 24,1). This lengthy part isframed by 21,18-22 and 24,1-2. The link between these short scenescan be explained as follows. In 21,18-22, Jesus, who is on his way


from Bethany to the temple, causes a fig tree to wither in the presenceof his disciples. The tree is full of leaves but carries no fruit. The figtree is an image of the temple (cf. the cleansing of the temple in 21,12-13 and the announcement of the destruction of the temple complex in24,1-2).

Jesus culminates his activities in Jerusalem with the Eschatolo-gical Discourse. This takes place on the Mount of Olives, opposite thetemple. The discourse is directed at his disciples and is about the longperiod between Jesus’ resurrection and his parousia.

** *

The last step in my search is to combine the results in a schemethat renders a clear view of the macrostructure of Matthew, the variousparts of which I will provide with headings. The result is printed at theend of this article.

What is new about this hypothesis is that it provides a layeredimage of the structure of Matthew’s Gospel. At the first level, thestructure is still coarse; at the second and third levels, the structure ofthe corpus (4,18–25,46) is presented gradually in more detail. What isalso new is the insight that a number of passages function as hinges.Such a hinge text is linked with both the sequence that precedes it andthe one that follows it. The size of these sequences is relatively largeat the first level. At the second level, they are smaller and, at the thirdlevel, even smaller still.

These two new insights explain why earlier research on themacrostructure of Matthew has led to such diverse results. Too muchattention has been paid to rigid caesuras, whilst a typical characteristicof the composition of Matthew is the relatively smooth flow of thestory. The various sections of the book partly overlap. In the hingetexts, patterns that have already been set are repeatedly continuedwhilst, at the same time, new patterns are indicated that are thenfurther developed.

Faculty of Theology and Religious Studies Wim J.C. WEREN

Tilburg UniversityP.O. Box 90153NL-5000 LE Tilburg

198 Wim J.C. Weren

SUMMARY

The weakness of the proposals concerning the macrostructure of Matthew’sGospel made by Bacon and Kingsbury is that they depart from rigid caesuras,whilst a typical characteristic of the composition of this Gospel is the relativelysmooth flow of the story. On the basis of the discovery that the varioustopographical data are clustered together by means of three refrains we candistinguish three patterns in the travels undertaken by Jesus. This rather coarsestructure is further refined with the use of Matera’s and Carter’s distinctionbetween kernels and satellites. Kernels are better labelled as “hinge texts”. Thefollowing pericopes belong to this category: 4,12-17; 11,2-30; 16,13-28; 21,1-17;26,1-16. Each of them marks a turning point in the plot and has a double function:a hinge text is not only fleshed out in the subsequent pericopes but also refers tothe preceding block. It is especially these “hinge texts” that underline thecontinuity of Matthew’s narrative and should prevent us from focussing too muchon alleged caesuras.


200 Wim J.C. Weren

Ove

rvie

w o

f th

e m

acro

stru

ctur

e of

Mat

thew

’s G

ospe

l

1,1–

4,11

Ove

rtur

e:Je

sus’

ori

gin,

iden

tity,

and

mis

sion

26,1

7–28

,20

Fin

ale:

suff

erin

g, d

eath

,re

surr

ectio

n;st

art o

f th

edi

scip

les’

m

issi

on to

all

natio

ns

26,1

-16

Hin

ge:

Jesu

s is

anoi

nted

an

d w

ill

be h

ande

dov

er

4,18

–11,

1C

allin

g of

the

four

fish

erm

en;

Mes

siah

inw

ord

and

deed

; se

ndin

g ou

t of

the

twel

ve

11,2

-30

Hin

ge:

revi

ew o

f th

e w

ork

of J

ohn

and

Jesu

s

12,1

–16,

12T

he

king

dom

,hi

dden

and

reve

aled

16,1

3-28

Hin

ge:

the

Son

of G

od

is a

suf

feri

ngM

essi

ah

4,18

–16,

12M

ove

away

fro

m J

erus

alem

and

Jud

ea17

,1–2

5,46

Jour

ney

to J

erus

alem

and

wor

k th

ere

17,1

–20,

34Jo

urne

y to

Jeru

sale

m

to s

uffe

r an

d di

e th

ere

21,1

-17

Hin

ge:

Arr

ival

inJe

rusa

lem

an

d fi

rst

conf

ront

atio

ns

in th

e te

mpl

e

21,1

8–25

,46

Jesu

s is

ac

tive

inJe

rusa

lem

4,12

-17

Hin

ge:

Jesu

s’

mis

sion

be

gins

inC

aper

naum

4,17

–25,

46C

orpu

s:M

inis

try;

fi

ve le

ngth

y di

scou

rses

Documents

Estructura de Mateo